Translated Titles

Establishmemt of Wood Classification System of Hamamelididae





Key Words

金縷梅亞綱木材 ; 支序分類 ; 木材分類系統 ; Wood of Hamamelididae ; Cladistic classification ; Wood classification system



Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication


Academic Degree Category




Content Language


Chinese Abstract

本研究旨建立金縷梅亞綱木材分類系統並詮釋其分類與演化上之意涵,並將所建立之金縷梅亞綱木材分類系統與現代植物分類系統作比較。研究對象為克儂氏系統所稱之金縷梅亞綱具木質莖部之諸屬;研究方法以支序分類方法為主,數量分類方法為輔。研究結果顯示不管以支序分類分析或數量分類分析皆有”過渡區域” 的存在;其所建立的金縷梅亞綱木材分類系統以金縷梅科為金縷梅亞綱木材之推論祖先,並依其親緣關係可將金縷梅部歸併為低等金縷梅類,過渡區域主要以假水青岡部為主,並包含金縷梅科、法國梧桐科、榆科、胡桃科少數屬,而榆部與胡桃部則為高等金縷梅類;金縷梅亞綱木材分類系統與達克達揚氏系統最為相似,與被子植物親緣群系統差異最大。

English Abstract

The study aimed to establish wood classification system of Hamamelididae, to explain the meanings of classification and evolution and to compare it with modern systems of classification of the flowering plants. The materials of the study are the species that were classified in Hamamelididae by Cronquist system and had wooden stem. Cladistic classification is the main method and numerical classification is the adjuvant method. Whether we use cladistic classification and numerical classification, the results shows that the transitional field is existent in Hamamelididae. The wood classification system of Hamamelididae shows that Hamamelidaceae is the inferential ancestor of wood of Hamamelididae. According to the phylogenetic relationship, we can classify Hamamelidales to lower hamamelids. The main component of transitional field is Nothofagales. The transitional field also includes a few genera of Hamamelidaceae, Platanaceae, Ulmaceae and Juglandaeae. Ulmaceae and Juglandaeae belong to higher hamamelids. The wood classification system of Hamamelididae is the most similar to Takhtajan system, and is the most different from Angiosperm Phylogeny Group system.

Topic Category 農業暨自然資源學院 > 森林學系所
生物農學 > 森林
  1. Ancukiewize, M. 1998. An unsupervised and nonparametric classification procedure based on mixtures with known weights. Journal of Classification 15:129-141.
  2. Angiosperm Phylogeny Group. 1998. An ordinal classification for the families of flowering plants. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 85:531-553.
  3. Bailey, I. W. 1944. The Development of vessel in angiosperms and its significance in morphological research. American Journal of Botany 31:421-428.
  4. Bailey, I. W. 1953. Evolution of the tracheary tissue of land plants. American Journal of Botany 40:4-8.
  5. Bass, P., E. wheeler, and M. Chase. 2000. Dicotylendonous wood anatomy and the APG system of angiosperm classification. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 134:3-17.
  6. Bogle A. L. 1989. The floral morphology, vascular anatomy, and ontogeny of the Rhodoleioideae (Hamamelidaceae) and their significance in relation to the “lower” hamamelids. Pages 201–220. in Crane and Blackmore. Evolution, Systematics, and Fossil History of the Hamamelidae. VolumeⅠ:Introduction and “Lower” Hamamelidae. Oxford University Press, New York. 1989.
  7. Bremer, K., A. Backlund, B. Semblad, U. Swenson, K. Andreasen, M. Hjerston, J. Lundberg, M. Backlund, and B. Bremer. 2001. A phylogenetic analysis of 100 + genera and 50+ families of euasterids based on morphological and molecular data with notes on possible higher level morphological synapomorphies. Plant Systematics and Evolution 229:137-169.
  8. Carlquist, S. 1980. Anatomy and systematics of Balanopaceae. Allertonia 2:191-246.
  9. Carlquist, S. 1982. Wood anatomy of Daphniphyllaceae: ecological and phylogenetic considerations, review of pittosporalean families. Brittonia 34: 252-266.
  10. Carlquist, S. 1996. Wood anatomy of primitive angiosperms:new perspectives and syntheses. pp. 68-90 in Taylor and Hickey. Flowering Plant Origin, Evolution and Phylogeny. Chapman & Hall, New York.
  11. Carlquist, S. 2001. Comparative Wood Anatomy. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, Giessn.
  12. Carlquist, S. 2002. Wood and bark anatomy of Myricaceae:relationship, generic definitions, and ecological interpretation. Aliso 21(1):7–29.
  13. Chalk, L., M. D. and D. Phil. 1937. The phylogenetic value of certain anatomical features of dicotylendonous woods. Annals of Botany 1(3):409-428.
  14. Cronquist, A. 1988. The Evolution and Classification of Flowering Plants. The New York Botanical Garden, New York.
  15. Cuerrier A., L. Brouillet, and D. Barabe. 1998. Numerical and comparative analyses of the modern systems of classification of the flowering plants. The Botanical Review 64(4):323-355.
  16. Ehrendorfer, F. 1989. The phylogenetic position of the Hamamelidae. pp. 1-7 in Crane and Blackmore. Evolution, Systematics, and Fossil History of the Hamamelidae. VolumeⅠ:Introduction and “Lower” Hamamelidae. Oxford University Press, New York.1989.
  17. Forey, P. L., C. J. Humphries, I. J. Kitching, R. W. Scotland, D. J. Siebert and D. M. Williams. 1992. Cladistics: A Practical Course in Systematics. Clarendon Press. Oxford.
  18. Hall, J.W. 1952. The comparative anatomy and phylogeny of the Betulaceae. Botanical Gazette 113:235-270.
  19. Heimsch, C. and R. H. Wetmore. 1939. The significance of wood anatomy in the taxonomy of the Juglandaceae. American Journal of Botany 26:651-660.
  20. Herendeen, P. S. and R. B. Miller. 2000. Utility of wood anatomical characters in cladistic analysis. IAWA Journal 21(3):247-276.
  21. Huang G. L. 1986. Comparative anatomical studies on the woods of the Hamamelidaceae in China. Sunyatsenia 1:24–26.
  22. Hufford, L. D. and P. R. Crane. 1989. A preliminary phylogenetic analysis of “lower” Hamamelidae. pp. 175-192 in Crane and Blackmore. Evolution, Systematics, and Fossil History of the Hamamelidae. VolumeⅠ:Introduction and “Lower” Hamamelidae. Oxford University Press, New York. 1989.
  23. IAWA Committee. 1989. IAWA list of microscopic features for hardwood identification. IAWA Bulletin n. s. 10(3):219-332.
  24. Jansen, S., E. Smets, and P. Bass. 1998. Vestures in woody plants:a review. IAWA Journal 19(4):347-382.
  25. Kribs, D. A. 1935. Salient lines of structural specialization in the wood rays of dicotyledons. Botanical Gazette 96:547-557.
  26. Leuschner, D. 1991. A mathematical model for classification and identification. Journal of Classification 8:99-113.
  27. Metcalfe, C. R. and L. Chalk. 1972a. Anatomy of the Dicotyledons:VolumeⅠ. Oxford University Press. London.
  28. Metcalfe, C. R. and L. Chalk. 1972b. Anatomy of the Dicotyledons:VolumeⅡ. Oxford University Press. London.
  29. Moseley, M. F. 1948. Comparative anatomy and phylogeny of the Casuarinaceae. Botanical Gazette 110:231-280.
  30. Ohtani, J. 1986. Vestures in axial parenchyma cells. IAWA Bulletin n.s. 7(1):39-45.
  31. Pires, A. M. and J. A. Branco. 1997. Comparison of multinomial classification rules. Journal of Classification 14:137-145.
  32. Poole, I. 2000. Fossil angiosperm wood:its role in the reconstruction of biodiversity and palaeoenvironment. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society. 134:361-381.
  33. Roth, A., V. Mosbrugger, and A. Wunderlin. 1998. Computer simulations as a tool for understanding the evolution of water transport systems in land plants:a review and new data. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 102:79-99.
  34. Sweitzer, E.M. 1971. Comparative anatomy of Ulmaceae. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum 52: 523-585.
  35. Takhajan A. 1997. Diversity And Classification Of Flowering Plants, Columbia University Press, New York.
  36. The Angiosperm Phylogeny Group. 2003. An update of the angiosperm phylogeny group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants:APG Ⅱ. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 141:399-436.
  37. Thorne, R. F. 1992. Classification and geography of the flowering plants. The Botanical Review 58(3):225-348.
  38. Tippo, 0. 1940. The comparative anatomy of the secondary xylem and the phylogeny of the Eucommiaceae. American Journal of Botany 27: 832-838.
  39. Tyree, M. T., S. D. Davis, and H. Cochard. 1994. Biophysical perspectives of tradeoff of hydraulic efficiency for vulnerability to dysfunction? IAWA Journal 15(4):335-360.
  40. Wheeler, E. A. and P. Bass. 1991. A survey of the fossil record for dicotylendonous wood and its significance for evolutionary and ecological wood anatomy. IAWA Bulletin n.s. 12(3):275-332.
  41. Wheeler, E. A. and P. Bass. 1998. Wood identification: a review. IAWA Journal 19(3):241-264.
  42. 王東、高淑貞,1991,中國連香樹科的系統研究,Ⅱ.次生木質部的顯微和超微結構。西北植物學報 11(4):287-291。
  43. 周正、陳喜軍、薛茂賢,1997,世界主要用材擗種概論。中國林業出版杜。北京。
  44. 陶在樸,1999,系統動態學。五南圖書有限公司。台北市。
  45. 徐克學,1996,數學分類學。水產出版社,台北。
  46. 張芝玉,1981,馬尾樹科的形態及分類系統位置的討論。植物分類學報 19(2):168-178。
  47. 陳之瑞、路安民,1997,被子植物起源和早期演化研究的回顧與展望。植物分類學報 35(4):375-384。
  48. 陳星玉、陳小平譯,E. O. Wiley, D. J. Siegel-Causey, D. R. Brooks and V. A. Funk 著,1995,支序學派大全。水產出版社,基隆。
  49. 路安民、李建強、陳之瑞,1993,”低等”金縷梅類植物的起源與分布。植物分類學報 31(6):489-504。
  50. 黃大衛,1996,支序系統學概論。中國農業出版社,北京。
  51. 廖坤福,1987,木材組織學。國立中興大學教務處出版組。
  52. 鍾揚、李偉、黃德世,1994,分支分類的理論與方法。科學出版社,北京。
  53. 鐘大歡,2003,鑑別闊葉樹木材專家系統建立之研究,國立中興大學森林學系木材科學組博士論文。
  54. 蕭旭峰,1998,潛蠅科昆蟲之形態測量與系統分類研究。國立台灣大學植物病蟲害學研究所博士論文。
  55. Aldenderfer, M. S., and R. K. Blashfield. 1984. Cluster Analysis. SAGE Publications.
  56. Anderson, L. C. 1974. A study of systematic wood anatomy in Cannabis. Botanical Museum Leaflets Harvard University 24(2):29-36.
  57. Bonsen, K. J. and B. J. H. ter Welle. 1983. Comparative wood and leaf anatomy of the Cecropiaceae (Urticales). Bulletin du Museum National D'histoire Naturelle. Section B, Adansonia, Botanique, Phytochimie 5(2):151-177.
  58. Bonsen, K. J. and B. J. H. ter Welle. 1984. Systematic wood anatomy and affinities of the Urticaceae. Botanische Jahrbucher fur Systematik 105(1):49-71.
  59. Carlquist, S. 1976. Wood anatomy of Myrothamnus flabellifolia (Myrothamnaceae) and the problem of multiperforate perforation plates. Journal of The Arnold Arboretum 57: 119-126.
  60. Dahlgren, G. 1989. The last dahlgrenogram:system of classification of the dicotyledons. pp. 249-260 in Tan et al.. Plant Taxonomy, Phytogeography, and Related Subjects. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.
  61. Forest Products Research Steering Committee. 1961. Identification of Hardwood:A Microscope Key. Forest Products Research 46. London.
  62. Gordon, A. D. 1999. Classification. Chapman & Hall/CRC.
  63. Henning, W. translated by D. D. Dwight and R. Zangerl. 1979. Phylogenetic Systematics. University of Illinois Press. U. S.
  64. Hoadley, R. B. 1990. Identifying Wood. The Taunton Press, U. S.
  65. Jones, S. B. and A. E. Luchsinger. 1987. Plant Systematics, McGraw-Hill, Singapore.
  66. Kitching, I. J., P. L. Forey, C. J. Humphries, and D. M. Williams. 2000. Cladistics. Oxford University Press Inc. New York.
  67. Nast, C. G. and I. W. Bailey. 1946. Morphology of Euptelea and comparison with Trochodendron. Journal of The Arnold Arboretum 27:186-192.
  68. Sneath, P. H. A. and R. R. Sokal. 1973. Numerical Taxonomy. W. H. Freeman and Company. San Francisco.
  69. Soltis D. E., P. S. Solitis, M. W. Chase, M. E. Mort, D. C. Albach, M. Zanis, V. Savolainen, W. H. Hahn, S. B. Hoot, M. F. Fay, M.Axtell, S. M. Swensen, L. M. Prince, W. J. Kress, K. C. Nixon, and J. S. Farris. 2000. Angiosperm phylogeny inferred from 18S rDNA, rbcL, and atpB sequences. Botanical Journal of Linnean Society 133:381-461.
  70. Strwart, W. N. and G. W. Rothell. 1993. Paleobotany and the Evolution of Plants, Cambridge University Press, New York.
  71. Takahashi, A. 1985. Wood anatomical studies of polycarpicae. Ⅰ. Mognoliales. Science Reports 34:29-83.
  72. Wiley, E. O., D. Siegel-Causey, D. R. Brooks and V. A. Funk. 1991. The Compleat Cladist. The University of Kansas Printing Service. Kansas.